I think there’s still enormous uncertainty that animal welfare interventions are better than human ones. Are you saying that’s not the case?
I think it is clear that the best animal welfare interventions are much more cost-effective than the best human welfare interventions.
After the project decided to assume hedonism and dismiss neuron count, the cumulative percent of these 90 behavioral proxies became the basis for their welfare range estimates. Although the team used a number of models in their final analysis, these models were mostly based on different weightings of these same behavioral proxies.
The welfare range of chickens is higher than RP’s median under the 2 models besides the neuron count one which do not rely on behaviour:
If one puts at least 10 % weight on the quantitative model, which “aggregates several quantifiably characterizable physiological measurements related to activity in the pain processing system”, the welfare range of chickens will be at least 16.9 % (= 0.1*1.69) of RP’s median.
I think it is clear that the best animal welfare interventions are much more cost-effective than the best human welfare interventions.
The welfare range of chickens is higher than RP’s median under the 2 models besides the neuron count one which do not rely on behaviour:
For the quantitative model, it is 1.69 (= 0.641*0.876/0.332) times as high.
For the equality model, it is 2.51 (= 0.953*0.876/0.332) times as high.
If one puts at least 10 % weight on the quantitative model, which “aggregates several quantifiably characterizable physiological measurements related to activity in the pain processing system”, the welfare range of chickens will be at least 16.9 % (= 0.1*1.69) of RP’s median.